pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.10929 · v1 · pith:RRBW56OYnew · submitted 2019-06-26 · 🪐 quant-ph

Entanglement Certification - From Theory to Experiment

Nicolai Friis , Giuseppe Vitagliano , Mehul Malik , Marcus Huber This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 15:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords entanglementcertificationquantum informationdetection methodsprior informationquantum statesmeasurementsquantum technologies
0
0 comments X

The pith

Entanglement certification methods work differently depending on the prior information one assumes about the states and measurements.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This review surveys how to detect and certify entanglement in quantum systems when exact quantification proves too demanding. It organizes the many available methods around the amount of prior knowledge an experimenter is willing to assume about the states and the measurements performed. A sympathetic reader cares because quantum technologies need practical ways to confirm entanglement without full characterization of complex states. The paper shows that stronger assumptions enable more powerful or efficient certification while weaker assumptions require more robust but often costlier protocols. Both theoretical constructions and experimental realizations are covered for two-qubit, high-dimensional, and multipartite cases.

Core claim

Exact quantification of entanglement is extremely demanding if at all possible for most quantum systems, so a range of certification methods is used instead; the applicability and performance of these methods strongly depends on the assumptions one is willing to make regarding the involved quantum states and measurements, in short, on the available prior information about the quantum system.

What carries the argument

Entanglement certification methods whose performance trades off against the level of prior information assumed about the quantum states and the measurements.

If this is right

  • Certification protocols can be selected according to what an experiment can realistically control or assume.
  • Resource-efficient detection becomes possible once limited prior information is granted.
  • High-dimensional and many-party entanglement can still be certified under appropriate assumptions even when full tomography is infeasible.
  • Theoretical quantifiers translate into concrete experimental tests once the corresponding assumptions are stated.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Methods that require fewer assumptions may become more attractive as experimental control improves.
  • The same assumption-based approach could be applied to certifying other quantum resources such as coherence or magic.
  • Comparing certification outcomes across different assumption levels on the same physical device would test how sensitive the methods are to incorrect priors.

Load-bearing premise

Exactly quantifying the amount of entanglement is extremely demanding, if at all possible, for most quantum systems.

What would settle it

An experiment that achieves full, assumption-free quantification of entanglement for a high-dimensional multipartite state.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.10929 by Giuseppe Vitagliano, Marcus Huber, Mehul Malik, Nicolai Friis.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. High-dimensional entanglement has been realised in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Entanglement is an important resource that allows quantum technologies to go beyond the classically possible. There are many ways quantum systems can be entangled, ranging from the archetypal two-qubit case to more exotic scenarios of entanglement in high dimensions or between many parties. Consequently, a plethora of entanglement quantifiers and classifiers exist, corresponding to different operational paradigms and mathematical techniques. However, for most quantum systems, exactly quantifying the amount of entanglement is extremely demanding, if at all possible. This is further exacerbated by the difficulty of experimentally controlling and measuring complex quantum states. Consequently, there are various approaches for experimentally detecting and certifying entanglement when exact quantification is not an option, with a particular focus on practically implementable methods and resource efficiency. The applicability and performance of these methods strongly depends on the assumptions one is willing to make regarding the involved quantum states and measurements, in short, on the available prior information about the quantum system. In this review we discuss the most commonly used paradigmatic quantifiers of entanglement. For these, we survey state-of-the-art detection and certification methods, including their respective underlying assumptions, from both a theoretical and experimental point of view.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. This review article surveys paradigmatic quantifiers of entanglement and state-of-the-art detection and certification methods for quantum systems. It emphasizes that exact quantification is often extremely demanding or impossible, necessitating certification approaches whose applicability depends strongly on prior information and assumptions about states and measurements, and covers these from both theoretical and experimental perspectives.

Significance. If the survey is comprehensive and accurate, the manuscript offers a structured consolidation of existing methods that can guide selection of resource-efficient certification techniques under varying assumptions. This is a useful reference for the quantum information community working on entanglement as a resource, though the paper introduces no new derivations, proofs, or data.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that the review discusses 'the most commonly used paradigmatic quantifiers' but does not specify selection criteria or time frame; adding a sentence on scope would improve clarity.
  2. [§2] Notation for entanglement measures in the early sections uses multiple symbols without a consolidated table; a summary table of definitions would aid readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the positive recommendation to accept. The report accurately captures the scope and purpose of the review.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in this review article

full rationale

This manuscript is a review that compiles and surveys existing entanglement quantifiers, classifiers, detection, and certification methods from the literature. It introduces no original derivations, equations, fitted parameters, or novel proofs whose validity depends on internal self-reference. The highlighted statements on the demands of exact quantification and the role of prior information are standard field background, not load-bearing steps in any new argument. No self-citation chains, ansatzes, or renamings reduce any claimed result to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a review of existing literature, the paper introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5730 in / 824 out tokens · 31545 ms · 2026-05-25T15:58:38.116355+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Estimating the best separable approximation of non-pure spin-squeezed states

    quant-ph 2025-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Lower bounds on the best separable approximation distance for non-pure spin-squeezed states are obtained from the complete set of spin-squeezing inequalities, with symmetry-exploiting optimization for upper bounds, re...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

299 extracted references · 299 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 228 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?

    Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?” Phys. Rev.47, 777–780 (1935)

    work page 1935

  2. [2]

    On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox,

    John Stewart Bell, “On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox,” Physics 1, 195–200 (1964)

    work page 1964

  3. [3]

    Experimen- tal Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories,

    Stuart J. Freedman and John F. Clauser, “Experimen- tal Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 938 (1972)

    work page 1972

  4. [4]

    Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell’s Theorem,

    Alain Aspect, Philippe Grangier, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell’s Theorem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 460–463 (1981)

    work page 1981

  5. [5]

    Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen- Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell’s Inequalities,

    Alain Aspect, Philippe Grangier, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen- Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell’s Inequalities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91–94 (1982)

    work page 1982

  6. [6]

    Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers,

    Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982)

    work page 1982

  7. [7]

    Teleporting an Un- known Quantum State via Dual Classical and Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen Channels,

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Cr´ epeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, “Teleporting an Un- known Quantum State via Dual Classical and Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen Channels,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895– 1899 (1993)

    work page 1993

  8. [8]

    Quantum cryp- tography: public key distribution and coin tossing,

    Charles H. Bennett and Gilles Brassard, “Quantum cryp- tography: public key distribution and coin tossing,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing (1984) pp. 175–179

    work page 1984

  9. [9]

    Quantum cryp- tography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,

    Charles H. Bennett and Gilles Brassard, “Quantum cryp- tography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,” Theor. Comput. Sci. 560, 7–11 (2014), originally pub- lished in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing, pp. 175- 179 (1984)

    work page 2014

  10. [10]

    Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem,

    A. K. Ekert, “Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991)

    work page 1991

  11. [11]

    Experimental Quantum Teleportation,

    D. Bouwmeester, Jian-Wei Pan, K. Mattle, M. Eibl, H. Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger, “Experimental Quantum Teleportation,” Nature 390, 575–579 (1997)

    work page 1997

  12. [12]

    Violation of Bell's inequality under strict Einstein locality conditions

    Gregor Weihs, Thomas Jennewein, Christoph Simon, Harald Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger, “Violation of Bell’s Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5039–5043 (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9810080

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  13. [13]

    Practical Quantum Key Distribution with Polarization-Entangled Photons

    A. Poppe, A. Fedrizzi, T. Loruenser, O. Maurhardt, R. Ursin, H. R. B¨ ohm, M. Peev, M. Suda, C. Kurtsiefer, H. Weinfurter, T. Jennewein, and Anton Zeilinger, “Practical Quantum Key Distribution with Polarization- Entangled Photons,” Opt. Express12, 3865–3871 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0404115

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  14. [14]

    Free-Space distribution of entanglement and single photons over 144 km

    R. Ursin, F. Tiefenbacher, T. Schmitt-Manderbach, H. Weier, T. Scheidl, M. Lindenthal, B. Blauensteiner, T. Jennewein, J. Perdigues, P. Trojek, B. Oemer, M. Fuerst, M. Meyenburg, J. Rarity, Z. Sodnik, C. Barbi- eri, H. Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger, “Entanglement- based quantum communication over 144 km,” Nat. Phys. 3, 481–486 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0607182

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  15. [15]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 2000)

    work page 2000

  16. [16]

    Bell nonlocality

    Nicolas Brunner, Daniel Cavalcanti, Stefano Pironio, Va- lerio Scarani, and Stephanie Wehner, “Bell nonlocality,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 419–478 (2014), arXiv:1303.2849

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  17. [17]

    Loophole-free Bell test using electron spins in diamond: second experiment and additional analysis

    B. Hensen, H. Bernien, A. E. Dr´ eau, A. Reiserer, N. Kalb, M. S. Blok, J. Ruitenberg, R. F. L. Vermeulen, R. N. Schouten, C. Abell´ an, W. Amaya, V. Pruneri, M. W. Mitchell, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, D. Elk- ouss, S. Wehner, T. H. Taminiau, and R. Hanson, “Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres,” Nature...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  18. [18]

    Significant-loophole-free test of Bell's theorem with entangled photons

    Marissa Giustina, Marijn A. M. Versteegh, S¨ oren Wengerowsky, Johannes Handsteiner, Armin Hochrainer, Kevin Phelan, Fabian Steinlechner, Johannes Kofler, Jan-˚Ake Larsson, Carlos Abell´ an, Waldimar Amaya, Valerio Pruneri, Morgan W. Mitchell, J¨ orn Beyer, Thomas Gerrits, Adriana E. Lita, Lynden K. Shalm, Sae Woo Nam, Thomas Scheidl, Rupert Ursin, Bernhar...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  19. [19]

    A strong loophole-free test of local realism

    Lynden K. Shalm, Evan Meyer-Scott, Bradley G. Chris- tensen, Peter Bierhorst, Michael A. Wayne, Martin J. Stevens, Thomas Gerrits, Scott Glancy, Deny R. Hamel, Michael S. Allman, Kevin J. Coakley, Shellee D. Dyer, Carson Hodge, Adriana E. Lita, Varun B. Verma, Camilla Lambrocco, Edward Tortorici, Alan L. Migdall, Yanbao Zhang, Daniel R. Kumor, William H. ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  20. [20]

    Quantum states with Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model,

    Reinhard F. Werner, “Quantum states with Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model,” Phys. Rev. A 40, 4277 (1989)

    work page 1989

  21. [21]

    Nonsequential positive-operator-valued measurements on entangled mixed states do not always violate a Bell inequality

    J. Barrett, “Nonsequential positive-operator-valued mea- surements on entangled mixed states do not always vio- late a Bell inequality,” Phys. Rev. A 65, 042302 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0107045

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  22. [22]

    Grothendieck’s con- stant and local models for noisy entangled quantum states,

    A. Ac´ ın, N. Gisin, and B. Toner, “Grothendieck’s con- stant and local models for noisy entangled quantum states,” Phys. Rev. A 73, 062105 (2006), arXiv:quant- ph/0606138

    work page arXiv 2006

  23. [23]

    More efficient Bell inequalities for Werner states

    Tam´ as V´ ertesi, “More efficient Bell inequalities for Werner states,” Phys. Rev. A 78, 032112 (2008), arXiv:0806.0096

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  24. [24]

    Better local hidden variable models for two-qubit Werner states and an upper bound on the Grothendieck constant $K_G(3)$

    Flavien Hirsch, Marco T´ ulio Quintino, Tam´ as V´ ertesi, Miguel Navascu´ es, and Nicolas Brunner, “Better local hidden variable models for two-qubit Werner states and an upper bound on the Grothendieck constant KG(3),” Quantum 1, 3 (2017), arXiv:1609.06114

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  25. [25]

    Characterizing Entanglement

    Dagmar Bruß, “Characterizing Entanglement,” J. Math. Phys. 43, 4237–4251 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0110078

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  26. [26]

    An introduction to entanglement measures

    Martin B. Plenio and S. Virmani, “An introduction to en- tanglement measures,” Quant. Inf. Comput. 7, 1 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0504163

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  27. [27]

    Quantifying entanglement resources

    C. Eltschka and J. Siewert, “Quantifying entanglement resources,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47, 424005 (2014), arXiv:quant-ph/1402.6710

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  28. [28]

    Quantum entanglement,

    Ryszard Horodecki, Pawe l Horodecki, Micha l Horodecki, 18 and Karol Horodecki, “Quantum entanglement,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865–942 (2009), arXiv:quant- ph/0702225

    work page arXiv 2009

  29. [29]

    Entanglement detection

    Otfried G¨ uhne and G´ eza T´ oth, “Entanglement detec- tion,” Phys. Rep. 474, 1–75 (2009), arXiv:0811.2803

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  30. [30]

    Quantum information with continuous variables

    Samuel L. Braunstein and Peter van Loock, “Quantum information with continuous variables,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 513–577 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0410100

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  31. [31]

    Alessandro Ferraro, Stefano Olivares, and Matteo G. A. Paris, Gaussian States in Quantum Information , Napoli Series on Physics and Astrophysics (Bibliopolis, 2005) arXiv:quant-ph/0503237

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  32. [32]

    Entanglement in continuous variable systems: Recent advances and current perspectives

    Gerardo Adesso and Fabrizio Illuminati, “Entanglement in continuous variable systems: Recent advances and cur- rent perspectives,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40, 7821 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0701221

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  33. [33]

    Continuous Variable Quantum Information Processing

    U. L. Andersen, G. Leuchs, and C. Silber- horn, “Continuous-variable quantum information pro- cessing,” Laser Photonics Rev. 4, 337–354 (2010), arXiv:1008.3468

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  34. [34]

    Gaussian Quantum Information

    Christian Weedbrook, Stefano Pirandola, Ra´ ul Garc´ ıa- Patr´ on, Nicolas J. Cerf, Timothy C. Ralph, Jef- frey H. Shapiro, and Seth Lloyd, “Gaussian quan- tum information,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 621–669 (2012), arXiv:1110.3234

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  35. [35]

    Continuous variable quantum information: Gaussian states and beyond

    Gerardo Adesso, Sammy Ragy, and Antony R. Lee, “Continuous Variable Quantum Information: Gaussian States and Beyond,” Open Syst. Inf. Dyn. 21, 1440001 (2014), arXiv:1401.4679

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  36. [36]

    Security of quantum key distribution using d-level systems

    N. J. Cerf, M. Bourennane, A. Karlsson, and N. Gisin, “Security of Quantum Key Distribution Using d- Level Systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 127902 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0107130

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  37. [37]

    Maximally Non-Local and Monogamous Quantum Correlations

    J. Barrett, A. Kent, and S. Pironio, “Maximally Non- local and Monogamous Quantum Correlations,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 170409 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0605182

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  38. [38]

    Experimental Quantum Cryptography with Qutrits

    S. Gr¨ oblacher, T. Jennewein, Alipasha Vaziri, Gregor Weihs, and Anton Zeilinger, “Experimental quantum cryptography with qutrits,” New J. Phys. 8, 75 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0511163

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  39. [39]

    Weak randomness in device independent quantum key distribution and the advantage of using high dimensional entanglement

    M. Huber and M. Pawlowski, “Weak randomness in de- vice independent quantum key distribution and the ad- vantage of using high dimensional entanglement,” Phys. Rev. A 88, 032309 (2013), arXiv:1301.2455

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  40. [40]

    On the role of entanglement in quantum computational speed-up

    Richard Jozsa and Noah Linden, “On the Role of Entanglement in Quantum-Computational Speed-Up,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A Math. Phys. 459, 2011–2032 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0201143

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  41. [41]

    Universal quantum simulators,

    Seth Lloyd, “Universal quantum simulators,” Science 273, 1073–1078 (1996)

    work page 1996

  42. [42]

    Universal digital quantum simulation with trapped ions

    B. P. Lanyon, C. Hempel, D. Nigg, M. M¨ uller, R. Ger- ritsma, F. Z¨ ahringer, P. Schindler, J. T. Barreiro, M. Rambach, G. Kirchmair, M. Hennrich, Peter Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, “Universal digital quan- tum simulation with trapped ions,” Science 334, 57–61 (2011), arXiv:1109.1512

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  43. [43]

    An Open-System Quantum Simulator with Trapped Ions

    J. T. Barreiro, M. M¨ uller, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, T. Monz, M. Chwalla, M. Hennrich, C. F. Roos, Peter Zoller, and R. Blatt, “An open-system quantum simu- lator with trapped ions,” Nature 470, 486–491 (2011), arXiv:1104.1146

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  44. [44]

    Goals and oppor- tunities in quantum simulation,

    Juan Ignacio Cirac and Peter Zoller, “Goals and oppor- tunities in quantum simulation,” Nat. Phys. 8, 264–266 (2012)

    work page 2012

  45. [45]

    Engineered 2D Ising interactions on a trapped-ion quantum simulator with hundreds of spins

    Joseph W. Britton, Brian C. Sawyer, Adam C. Keith, C.-C. Joseph Wang, James K. Freericks, Hermann Uys, Michael J. Biercuk, and John. J. Bollinger, “Engineered 2D Ising interactions on a trapped-ion quantum simula- tor with hundreds of spins,” Nature484, 489–492 (2012), arXiv:1204.5789

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  46. [46]

    Entanglement in many-body systems,

    Luigi Amico, Rosario Fazio, Andreas Osterloh, and Vlatko Vedral, “Entanglement in many-body systems,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 517–576 (2008), arXiv:quant- ph/0703044

    work page arXiv 2008

  47. [47]

    Matrix Product States, Projected Entangled Pair States, and variational renormalization group methods for quantum spin systems

    F. Verstraete, V. Murg, and Juan Ignacio Cirac, “Ma- trix product states, projected entangled pair states, and variational renormalization group methods for quan- tum spin systems,” Adv. Phys. 57, 143–224 (2008), arXiv:0907.2796

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  48. [48]

    Area laws for the entanglement entropy - a review

    Jens Eisert, M. Cramer, and Martin B. Plenio, “Collo- quium: Area laws for the entanglement entropy,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 277–306 (2010), arXiv:0808.3773

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  49. [49]

    The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states

    Ulrich Schollw¨ ock, “The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states,” Ann. Phys. 326, 96–192 (2011), arXiv:1008.3477

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  50. [50]

    A Practical Introduction to Tensor Networks: Matrix Product States and Projected Entangled Pair States

    Rom´ an Or´ us, “A practical introduction to tensor net- works: Matrix product states and projected entan- gled pair states,” Ann. Phys. 349, 117–158 (2014), arXiv:1306.2164

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  51. [51]

    Review of Tensor Network Contraction Approaches,

    S.-J. Ran, E. Tirrito, C. Peng, X. Chen, G. Su, and M. Lewenstein, “Review of Tensor Network Contraction Approaches,” (2017), arXiv:1708.09213

    work page arXiv 2017

  52. [52]

    Spin squeezing and reduced quantum noise in spectroscopy,

    D. J. Wineland, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, F. L. Moore, and D. J. Heinzen, “Spin squeezing and reduced quantum noise in spectroscopy,” Phys. Rev. A46, R6797 (1992)

    work page 1992

  53. [53]

    On the Improvement of Frequency Stardards with Quan- tum Entanglement,

    S. F. Huelga, Chiara Macchiavello, T. Pellizzari, A. K. Ekert, Martin B. Plenio, and Juan Ignacio Cirac, “On the Improvement of Frequency Stardards with Quan- tum Entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3865 (1997), arXiv:9707014

    work page 1997

  54. [54]

    Quantum metrology

    Vittorio Giovannetti, Seth Lloyd, and Lorenzo Mac- cone, “Quantum Metrology,” Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 010401 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0509179

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  55. [55]

    Quantum metrology: why entanglement?

    Lorenzo Maccone, “Intuitive reason for the usefulness of entanglement in quantum metrology,” Phys. Rev. A 88, 042109 (2013), arXiv:1304.7609

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  56. [56]

    Flexible resources for quantum metrology

    Nicolai Friis, Davide Orsucci, Michalis Skotiniotis, Pavel Sekatski, Vedran Dunjko, Hans J. Briegel, and Wolfgang D¨ ur, “Flexible resources for quantum metrology,” New J. Phys. 19, 063044 (2017), arXiv:1610.09999

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  57. [57]

    Quantum metrology from a quantum information science perspective

    G´ eza T´ oth and Iagoba Apellaniz, “Quantum metrol- ogy from a quantum information science perspec- tive,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47, 424006 (2014), arXiv:1405.4878

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  58. [58]

    The European Quantum Technologies Roadmap

    Antonio Ac´ ın, Immanuel Bloch, Harry Buhrman, Tom- maso Calarco, Christopher Eichler, Jens Eisert, Daniel Esteve, Nicolas Gisin, Steffen J. Glaser, Fedor Jelezko, Stefan Kuhr, Maciej Lewenstein, Max F. Riedel, Piet O. Schmidt, Rob Thew, Andreas Wallraff, Ian Walms- ley, and Frank K. Wilhelm, “The quantum technologies roadmap: a European community view,” Ne...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  59. [59]

    Conditions for a class of entanglement transformations

    Michael A. Nielsen, “Conditions for a Class of Entangle- ment Transformations,” Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 436 (1999), arXiv:quant-ph/9811053

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  60. [60]

    Everything You Always Wanted to Know About LOCC (But Were Afraid to Ask)

    Eric Chitambar, Debbie Leung, Laura Manˇ cinska, Maris Ozols, and Andreas Winter, “Everything You Always 19 Wanted to Know About LOCC (But Were Afraid to Ask),” Commun. Math. Phys. 328, 303–326 (2014), arXiv:1210.4583

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  61. [62]

    Classical deterministic complexity of Edmonds' problem and Quantum Entanglement

    Leonid Gurvits, “Classical complexity and quantum en- tanglement,” J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 69, 448–484 (2004), special Issue on STOC 2003, arXiv:quant-ph/0303055

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  62. [63]

    Strong NP-Hardness of the Quantum Separability Problem

    Sevag Gharibian, “Strong NP-hardness of the quantum separability problem.” Quantum Inf. Comput. 10, 343– 360 (2010), arXiv:0810.4507

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  63. [64]

    Majorization and the interconversion of bipartite states,

    Michael A. Nielsen and Guifr´ e Vidal, “Majorization and the interconversion of bipartite states,” Quant. Inf. Com- put. 1, 76–93 (2001)

    work page 2001

  64. [65]

    Mixed State Entanglement and Quantum Error Correction

    C. H. Bennett, D. P. Di Vincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, “Mixed-state entanglement and quan- tum error correction,” Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9604024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  65. [66]

    Entanglement of Formation of an Arbitrary State of Two Qubits

    William K. Wootters, “Entanglement of Formation of an Arbitrary State of Two Qubits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2245 (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9709029

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  66. [67]

    The asymptotic entanglement cost of preparing a quantum state

    Patrick M. Hayden, Micha l Horodecki, and Barbara M. Terhal, “The asymptotic entanglement cost of preparing a quantum state,” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.34, 6891–6898 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0008134

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  67. [68]

    Concentrating Partial Entanglement by Local Operations

    Charles H. Bennett, Herbert J. Bernstein, Sandu Popescu, and Benjamin Schumacher, “Concentrating Partial Entanglement by Local Operations,” Phys. Rev. A 53, 2046–2052 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9511030

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2046

  68. [69]

    Purification of Noisy Entanglement and Faithful Teleportation via Noisy Channels

    Charles H. Bennett, Gilles Brassard, Sandu Popescu, Benjamin Schumacher, John A. Smolin, and William K. Wooters, “Purification of Noisy Entanglement and Faith- ful Teleportation via Noisy Channels,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 722–725 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9511027

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  69. [70]

    Superadditivity of communication capacity using entangled inputs

    M. B. Hastings, “A Counterexample to Additivity of Minimum Output Entropy,” Nat. Phys. 5, 255–257 (2009), arXiv:0809.3972

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  70. [71]

    A Schmidt number for density matrices

    Barbara M. Terhal and Pave l Horodecki, “Schmidt num- ber for density matrices,” Phys. Rev. A 61, 040301(R) (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/9911117

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  71. [72]

    4 Qubit Quantum State Tomography,

    Joseph B. Altepeter, Daniel F. V. James, and Paul G. Kwiat, “4 Qubit Quantum State Tomography,” inQuan- tum State Estimation , edited by Matteo Paris and Jaroslav ˇReh´ aˇ cek (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004) pp. 113–145

    work page 2004

  72. [73]

    Measurement of the entanglement of two superconducting qubits via state tomography,

    M. Ansmann, Radoslaw C. Bialczak, N. Katz, Erik Lucero, R. McDermott, Matthew Neeley, E. M. Weig, A. N. Cleland, and John M. Martinis, “Measurement of the entanglement of two superconducting qubits via state tomography,” Science 313, 1423 (2006)

    work page 2006

  73. [74]

    Separability Criterion for Density Matri- ces,

    Asher Peres, “Separability Criterion for Density Matri- ces,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996), arXiv:quant- ph/9604005

    work page arXiv 1996

  74. [75]

    Separability of Mixed States: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions

    Micha l Horodecki, Pawe l Horodecki, and Ryszard Horodecki, “Separability of mixed states: necessary and sufficient conditions,” Phys. Lett. A 223, 25 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9605038

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  75. [76]

    Mixed-state entanglement and distillation: is there a ``bound'' entanglement in nature?

    Micha l Horodecki, Pawe l Horodecki, and Ryszard Horodecki, “Mixed-State Entanglement and Distillation: Is there a “Bound” Entanglement in Nature?” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5239 (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9801069

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  76. [77]

    A few steps more towards NPT bound entanglement

    Lukasz Pankowski, Marco Piani, Micha l Horodecki, and Pawe l Horodecki, “A Few Steps More Towards NPT Bound Entanglement,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 56, 4085–4100 (2010), arXiv:0711.2613

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  77. [78]

    Many copies may be required for entanglement distillation

    John Watrous, “Many Copies May Be Required for En- tanglement Distillation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 010502 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0312123

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  78. [79]

    The logarithmic negativity: A full entanglement monotone that is not convex

    Martin B. Plenio, “Logarithmic Negativity: A Full En- tanglement Monotone That is not Convex,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 090503 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0505071

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  79. [80]

    Entanglement monotones

    Guifr´ e Vidal, “Entanglement monotones,” J. Mod. Opt. 47, 355–376 (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/9807077

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  80. [81]

    Eisert, Entanglement in quantum information theory , Ph.D

    J. Eisert, Entanglement in quantum information theory , Ph.D. thesis, University of Potsdam (2001), arXiv:quant- ph/0610253

    work page arXiv 2001

Showing first 80 references.